Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

I think tariffs should be imposed on countries who are using unethical methods to outcompete the USA (namely China), but it's not a long term solution.

Germany exists in a free trade block with many undevelopped countries (IE the EU), and yet it still has one of the largest trade surplusses in the world, with no jobs "leaving the country". America just needs to invest more in it's infrastructure and work with light, medium and heavy industry, rather then prostituting itself to services (Banking...).

Reason why he can't do that is because no one wants to take them in, not even America's toughest prisons, because these people are (supposedly) the most dangerous individuals on earth (which I tend to believe is a gross exaggeration, not to mention that a lot of them might not even be what they're said to be).

Barack Obama is the Commander-in-Chief of the American military forces. He has all the authority he needs to relocate the Guantanamo prisoners to some military penitentiary within the borders of the United States. If necessary, he could re-open some retired army base and put them there. What's Congress going to do? Take him to the Supreme Court? I think they'd lose that appeal.

Obama has been very inconsistent as C-in-C. He's not averse to authorizing the assassination of foreign "terrorists" including in the most recent case a native-born American citizen. Actions like these generally garner him support in contemporary America. Yet he's not been willing to take on Congress directly over things like the Guantanamo prisoners. He got the brass to endorse the ending of "don't ask, don't tell." He can't seem to get anybody to help him relocate those prisoners.

I think tariffs should be imposed on countries who are using unethical methods to outcompete the USA (namely China), but it's not a long term solution.

Germany exists in a free trade block with many undevelopped countries (IE the EU), and yet it still has one of the largest trade surplusses in the world, with no jobs "leaving the country". America just needs to invest more in it's infrastructure and work with light, medium and heavy industry, rather then prostituting itself to services (Banking...).

If Germany can do it, certainly America can.

Germany just seems to be working in many ways that the US isn't .... but half our population's brains just stop when "european socialism" is suggested as a place where good ideas might come from.

I think tariffs should be imposed on countries who are using unethical methods to outcompete the USA (namely China), but it's not a long term solution.

Germany exists in a free trade block with many undevelopped countries (IE the EU), and yet it still has one of the largest trade surplusses in the world, with no jobs "leaving the country". America just needs to invest more in it's infrastructure and work with light, medium and heavy industry, rather then prostituting itself to services (Banking...).

If Germany can do it, certainly America can.

Well, there's the large difference in military spending (I forget if it was restricted constitutionally after the war like Japan's). Also, there's been growing investment from American corps in Vietnam, Thailand, and other SEAsian countries even without China letting its currency float. If tarrifs are imposed it'd more or less be a tax on the American corps that are 'importing' the goods that they had finished in China for pennies on the dollar. When they do give, you'll just see China replaced by other cheap sources of labor to outcompete the US.

Well, there's the large difference in military spending (I forget if it was restricted constitutionally after the war like Japan's). Also, there's been growing investment from American corps in Vietnam, Thailand, and other SEAsian countries even without China letting its currency float. If tarrifs are imposed it'd more or less be a tax on the American corps that are 'importing' the goods that they had finished in China for pennies on the dollar. When they do give, you'll just see China replaced by other cheap sources of labor to outcompete the US.

Germany actually spends quite a lot on military, and US military spending tends to go to companies that manufacture within the United States anyway, so in a sense it's neutral, most of the money doesn't get leaked out to other foreign countries, though it does go to large military contractors...

The United States also benefits from many of those free trade agreements. For one thing the saving from those cheap imports get passed along to the consumer, the actual Chinese worker and factory receives a very small slice of the "pie" with most going to the designers, accountants, retailers and whatnot based in America.

You also get a market for American goods, the whole point after all is to increase America's exports.

In a sense it's also a very good form of charity. It's a very good way to help poorer nations get on their feet. And once those poorer nations are wealthier, well, that's another market for Coca Cola .

Germany actually spends quite a lot on military, and US military spending tends to go to companies that manufacture within the United States anyway, so in a sense it's neutral, most of the money doesn't get leaked out to other foreign countries, though it does go to large military contractors...

The United States also benefits from many of those free trade agreements. For one thing the saving from those cheap imports get passed along to the consumer, the actual Chinese worker and factory receives a very small slice of the "pie" with most going to the designers, accountants, retailers and whatnot based in America.

You also get a market for American goods, the whole point after all is to increase America's exports.

In a sense it's also a very good form of charity. It's a very good way to help poorer nations get on their feet. And once those poorer nations are wealthier, well, that's another market for Coca Cola .

What is left of out these "what is good for the US" discussions frequently is that the current situation is VERY GOOD for a small fraction of the US (the >1%)... its just utterly lousy for the 99%ers. So there's at least two "United States of America"s.... the one that can be characterized as the champagne-drinking banksters on the balcony laughing at the people on the street.... and the people on the street.

The US is throwing away the pretense of "all boats rise together" and deep into the "I got mine by screwing you now just go die somewhere". The same forces in the 1850s, the 1890s, the 1920s and now the 1980s->now are moving.

I think tariffs should be imposed on countries who are using unethical methods to outcompete the USA (namely China), but it's not a long term solution.

Germany exists in a free trade block with many undevelopped countries (IE the EU), and yet it still has one of the largest trade surplusses in the world, with no jobs "leaving the country". America just needs to invest more in it's infrastructure and work with light, medium and heavy industry, rather then prostituting itself to services (Banking...).

If Germany can do it, certainly America can.

There is a historical reason why Germany is where it is today. The USA was always good in producing goods in incredible numbers. Typically medium quality goods that require lots of research and development, which could be easy recapitalized because of the high output.

In Germany very few companies can/wanted to compete on that level. Instead companies focused on niche and high quality goods, that also require a decent amount of research and development but cannot as easily recapitalize on it, because of the lower output of goods.
The know how build up slowly over generations. Which is also the reason, why these companies were naturally restricted in size. Oftentimes the niche products are not really suited for fully automated production (or the production line becomes very expensive because of many specialized mashines... etc).

I think niche products are harder to copy, because you need a lot of know how. Additionally copying niche products is not quite as beneficial because of the low output. Oftentimes you need highly trained specialists to build them, and those are expensive, no matter where the production is.

Having these "restricted in size" niche product companies is a key in the success of the german economy. These companies are very diverse and often structured like a family. Its hard to copy that without getting lots and lots of insider information.

would not be so hot without the innovative small and medium sized businesses here that specialize on supply and subcontracting of high quality, high standard prefabricated parts. Oftentimes there is more innovation in these parts then there is in the overall final product which is assembled in the big companies.
If the BMW or Audi was primarily made of parts from China... well I wouldn't say its the same car (quality-wise).

So, if the USA wanted to copy all that... it would need to find new niches, and at the same time build up a serious know how in those niches (which would require a more technical orientation of the education... less finances and law).
Today, I see such american companies in the making... for example the private space travel sector that starts developing (think about all the subcontracting and the parts making there is a lot of potential).

"Crowdsourcing began as a legitimate tool to leverage the wisdom of the crowds
to solve complex business and scientific challenges. Unfortunately, these very
same techniques are increasingly being adopted by the criminal underground for
nefarious purposes."

The United States also benefits from many of those free trade agreements. For one thing the saving from those cheap imports get passed along to the consumer, the actual Chinese worker and factory receives a very small slice of the "pie" with most going to the designers, accountants, retailers and whatnot based in America.

More accurately, this would be "the saving from those cheap imports get passed along to the shareholders and board of directors." This applies to even small businesses too, unfortunately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

In a sense it's also a very good form of charity. It's a very good way to help poorer nations get on their feet. And once those poorer nations are wealthier, well, that's another market for Coca Cola .

I wouldn't say it's quite that rosy. Developed nations' goods (even those made in developing nations) tend to get resold to those developing nations at the same outrageous prices (usually prohibitively expensive) they go for in the developed nation.

Spoiler for kind of ranty, sort of off topic:

This might seem tangential, but I feel the situation parallels the case of raw materials/commodities. Developed nations get to have a developing country ruin its environment and take political flack, exploiting the developing nation's laxer environmental policies on iron, copper, bauxite, rare earth metals, etc, make goods with those, and then sell them back to those developing countries at a very high markup; all along the while selling those countries the chemicals or equipment they 'need' in the case of less labor-intensive joint ventures, and protecting their own country's reserves until prices become much higher to warrant opening up those resources. Corporate imperialism, if you will.

Certainly helping a nation set up manufacturing capacity or resourcing operations helps them in the long term, and won't cause the kind of market distortions dumping tons of commodity food aid can do, but the fat check still goes to the North.

Mm, and there's issues about soft drink companies and water rights you might like to explore before you use that Cola bit again .

edit: "resold to those developed" changed to "resold to those developing"